KILLINGTON: The 2006 AlpineZone Ski Area Challenge

[Newpylong]

Good points..... If it wasn't for the fact that I grew up at Killington and remember its glory days, and the sheer terrain that it offers, I think I would have said goodbye a long time ago. The list of things that they have done that I despise goes on and on. Any ski area that reduces its skiable acreage is simply ignorant or in serious financial difficulties... I honestly think a lot of these decisions come from K management itself... I frequent Mt. Snow, Sunday and Sugarloaf, and while you can tell they are cash strapped, they are simply class act mountains compared.

 

[andyzee]

Don't know if it's real or a phony, but it appears that Killington may have answered these question on Kzone. http://www.killingtonzone.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11391&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=149

 

[Vortex]

I saw it and was waiting for some conformation. Looks real. I believe anythging.

I'm also looking for the good.

Maybe the nice e-mails and non bashing post about this helped. Credit due to those who handled it well.

 

[shwilly]

Nice. Good answers, too.

That's pretty bizarre to post answers to the AZ Challenge on KZone, though. Next time I'm at Killington and they give me a customer survey, I'm sending my answers to Cannon.

 

[Greg]

Don't know if it's real or a phony, but it appears that Killington may have answered these question on Kzone. http://www.killingtonzone.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11391&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=149

Nice. Good answers, too.

That's pretty bizarre to post answers to the AZ Challenge on KZone, though. Next time I'm at Killington and they give me a customer survey, I'm sending my answers to Cannon.

That appears legit. I don't have any specific reasons to think otherwise, but I too am curious why the official word was posted to K-zone and not here... :-?

 

[Bubbartzky]

That appears legit. I don't have any specific reasons to think otherwise, but I too am curious why the official word was posted to K-zone and not here... :-?

We get senior management attention and you don't? :wink:

 

[Greg]

We get senior management attention and you don't? :wink:

Ha! I guess so. Kudos.

 

[andyzee]

Keep in mind originally it's Tom that was going to give you the answers. On Kzone, it's his boss. Perhaps he saw all the fuss being made about this.

 

[Greg]

Well, if there was any doubt, Tom just confirmed that the responses on K-zone were indeed made by Dave.

 

[thebigo]

I was looking over the reaction both here and at kzone and it seems as if the lasting impression was more positive than if they had just answered the questions to begin with.

In the past there have been a few negative comments about incomplete answers or corporate speak. This time however the response was generally 'thank you for at least giving us something.'

Im not claiming anything here or making any statement, just an observation.

 

[thetrailboss]

A Comment on the Killington Challenge

After some comments about how the Challenge went, I wanted to take a minute to respond in here.

Some, including Mr. Horrocks, have condemned these questions because they were "Loaded." I have read them again and some parts do make me :roll: . But, again, this was the merging of the questions we received from everyone in here.

On balance, these are longer questions than normal because of the shear volume of input we got. In fact, it took me two weeks to read through the questions and put together the ones that did go out. There were some very negative comments and we attempted to convey the question with at least some of the original spirit and in the writer's own words (when possible). Two years ago we got flack for "dumbing down" reader's questions and not sticking to what people intended. Some of our most infamous posters have gone so far as to accuse us of "censoring" or "pandering to corporate interests." So last year, when I took over, I made an effort to revise and merge similar questions in an effort to get as much input and participation as possible while keeping them diplomatic and "real."

On the whole, it has worked quite well. I have not received any complaints from posters regarding the changes to their questions, in fact, as Bob R and others have pointed out, the connections made and revisions have been good.

Looking at the resort's take, I will say that this is the first complaint regarding the questions in now two years. Jay just responded to similar merged questions in under 2 hours. Sugarloaf replied in under a day. Last year, Sunapee responded to some criticism well. Pats Peak has repeatedly taken our input and implemented it. And Sugarbush has done a 180 with regards to input and listening to customers. This season posters had a direct line with Resort Owner and President, Win Smith. In fact, I receive PM's and personal E-mails from resorts asking that they be included in this Challenge. Representatives from Bolton and Burke have contacted me this season asking for questions and input. As it has been run, the program has much credibility and the wide majority of resorts value the program.

Some of the complaints stem from "attacking the resort," but our critics fail to recognize that we spent two weeks looking at, reading, revising, dumbing down, etc. the questions and then submitted them to Greg for final review before submission. There are some legitimate concerns and my interest was in conveying those feelings the best we could. One may get a headache from reading them, but the truth is that most posters do not want a simple, one sentence or "yes, no" response. Our posters are more dynamic than that and they demand, rightfully so, that we respect their views.

It is a tough line to walk, between the interests of the resort, the posters, and the board. We've done our best to negotiate it and not everyone is going to be happy with regards to the outcome. This is the first complaint in two years and I will admit that I do lean more towards giving our loyal posters the benefit from time to time. This is why the questions are sent to Greg for his input and review to try and balance out the other interests.

Another Killington representative has "reinterpreted" the questions and offered responses. We applaud him for doing so and wish that they had done so sooner. We appreciate their cooperation and this response and trust that they got your input. That is all we want for the Challenge.

In the end, it takes the cooperation of our posters, our administration, and the resorts. We hope that in the future that cooperation will continue. So far there has been an impressive track record.

 

[Greg]

Another Killington representative has "reinterpreted" the questions and offer responses. We applaud him for doing so and wish that he had sent them to us.

Tom did forward Dave's responses to me the next day. I don't know that it's necessary to officially post them here as a challenge response at this point, especially since the questions were so distilled down. Not responding to the questions as they were presented, nor the feedback/criticisms, takes the "challenge" part out of it in my opinion. I am appreciative that the underlying questions were answered though.

 

[Vortex]

Tb is correct on alot here. Pats peak is a great example. They know will have night skiing on Hurricane. They helped get us into the race program. They will be offering some deal for racers as well. Wait to hear on that from them.

The Sunday River responses and Sugaloaf ones have been great for a few years in a row.


Sugarbush's communication here has been fantastic IMO.

Jay.. Steve tell it as he sees it.

This series on the board is the best I have seen..
I believe skiers and riders get more direct non - canned info here, than they can get anywhere else.

TB and Greg really deserve alot of props here. Those who posted questions... it doesn't work without your help.

 

[thebigo]

How about a "reverse" ski Challenge? Invite ski areas to ask us questions and we could offer our insights.

That is one kick ass idea.

 

[Geoff]

And here are the questions that went out to Killington:

2. Geoff: I have been a Killington Passholder since 1981 and a property owner since 1993. I am really concerned about the food at your resort. I am so concerned that I will not spend another dime. Holding food costs to thirty-percent of the sale price just doesn't work. You end up with situations like the Bear Bar where $10 now buys you a stale roll with a single slice of meat and a single slice of cheese on it. The Chinese and Sushi at Mahogany Ridge is now too expensive. What can you do to improve quality of the food for the price? Any plans on adding more vegetarian dining options?

5. Geoff: I guess you did what you could with snowmaking given your budget constraints. I don't quite understand the economics of blowing all that snow on Outer Limits only to shut Bear after the second weekend in April. If you'd put down more base on the Cascade Runout, you could have had much of the mountain open until late April even in this bad winter. How come you didn't keep Outer Limits open instead of Superstar? What about snowmaking in other areas such as the Skyeship Base Area (Pipe Dream and Valley Plunge)? Other areas were good. There was some fabulous skiing on Devil's Fiddle last season thanks to very aggressive snowmaking on that trail. On the other hand, the Old Superstar and Ovation (which is very important for skiers to use to get to K-1 from Superstar) were largely overlooked. Killington was once the king of snowmaking. What can we expect for snowmaking this season?

8. Geoff: Trail closings for events has picked up significantly in recent years leading to some bad bottlenecks. When you have trails closed for races and other events, could you post notices at the bottom and top of all the lifts and also place a notation in the snowreports? For example, when there's a race on Skyelark, I want to know about it so I can avoid Bittersweet when most of the people getting off the Superstar and K1 lifts are going that way. Another problem that happened was that skiers and riders would go part-way down Highline only to hit a rope that pushed us down the rock dance to the Mouse Trap mayhem. There were also problems with Superstar in April (too narrow an opening for too many skiers). Bear Mountain is also dangerous because the current layout creates a bottleneck on Wildfire and Anti-Venom to Lower Bear Claw. What can Mountain Ops do to alleviate these problem areas?

Actually, I would like to complain a little. If you are going to put my name with a question, please don't merge other things into the question and attribute them to me.

 

[thetrailboss]

Actually, I would like to complain a little. If you are going to put my name with a question, please don't merge other things into the question and attribute them to me.

Well, if you read the instructions, you would have seen:

Also please don't be offended if we edit/change your question for grammar, tone, or some other minor thing. In order to get in all of the questions we MAY merge some questions but we'll do our best to keep the substance of your question.

The disclaimer has been there for over two years.

 

[Geoff]

Well, if you read the instructions, you would have seen:



The disclaimer has been there for over two years.

You added numerous sentences to my questions that were written by other people. That's not "editing". That's false attribution. If you do that in the future, please leave my name out of it.

 

[thetrailboss]

You added numerous sentences to my questions that were written by other people. That's not "editing". That's false attribution. If you do that in the future, please leave my name out of it.

Please read them again. The rule does extend to your concern, called "merging":

Also please don't be offended if we edit/change your question for grammar, tone, or some other minor thing. In order to get in all of the questions we MAY merge some questions but we'll do our best to keep the substance of your question.

Those have been the rules for two years....and you participated in both years. I'm not being condescending or anything...just stating that the rules have been this way and that by participating you accept them (or we assume that you have read them).

Your questions were excellent and, if taken individually, would have covered a good portion of the Challenge alone. In an effort to round out questions, to consolidate similar points so that everyone gets their opinions heard, and to reduce redundancy so that officials don't answer the same question again and again, we do merge questions and have for the past two years. This is the only complaint that I have heard about this, and in fact most people are not offended.

I am sorry that we did not make that clear enough and hope that you understand our POV.

If you have any more concerns, PM me.

 

[Greg]

I think Geoff's concern is that the merged question (which he may or may not have a problem with) was solely attributed to him. That's simply a function of the script I set up to display the responses. I have to attribute the question to somebody. Due to the volume of questions that the Killington challenge generated, Trailboss had to do a lot of merging and did a great job, IMHO. With that said, I can appreciate somebody not wanting points made by others attributed to him. Sorry, Geoff. This was simply a result of a "legacy" system and the number of questions/comments that we received that needed to be merged. Perhaps for next year we'll try to figure out a way to differentiate, or maybe not even attribute them to anyone. I personally wouldn't care if my question was merged with others' but I can see the other POV.

 

[Bubbartzky]

I'd suggest merging questions without putting a name to the merged version. What difference does it make who asked the question?